The Domain King®

Contact Me

Banners

25 Domain Sales $25MM+

I have only sold 35 of my 6500 domains.

Porno.com $8,888,888.88

This was the 4th largest recorded cash domain sale ever!
(Purchased for $42,000 in 1997) It is important to note that this domain had career earnings in excess of $15 Million via pay per click earnings and never had adult content)

989.com $818,181.81 (registered for $100 in 1997)

899.com $801,000 (registered for $100 in 1997)

9595.com $180,000 (registered for $100 in 1998)

Teem.com Total $972.000 after Equity payout

Earlier sales….

Men.com $1,320,000 (bought from 3rd party for $15,000 in 1997)

eBet.com $1,350,000 (registered for $100 in 1997)

Property.com/Properties.com $4MM + Equity Stake
(Bought from 3rd party for $750,000 in 2005)

I wrote this on May 2nd and have hoped I would be able to publish it in this form. I have to have 3 versions of this ready for when the decision comes down but I never was able to physically write the other 2. It would make me ill to even start. If you are reading THIS VERSION, we have reason to celebrate my friends as Marcio Mello Chaves, aka Marcio Chaves of buscape.com.br and saveme.com.br and brother Heitor have been labeled as REVERSE DOMAIN NAME HIJACKERS (RDNH)!! An attempted THEFT by an abuse of the system! Acted in 'Bad Faith.' GUILTY! If they did this in the real world, they would likely stand trial on criminal charges. That won't happen but most of us will agree that what they did was criminal whether acknowledged by the law at this time or not.

Márcio Mello Chaves, aka Márcio Chaves aka Marcio Chaves has been found GUILTY of REVERSE DOMAIN NAME HIJACKING and BAD FAITH by a unanimous 3 person panel of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in Geneva as he represented his brother Heitor Chaves and is now the OFFICIAL POSTER BOYS for Domain Hijacking and this type of attempted domain theft!! I do mean this literally. I will be having posters and banners made up with their images and ignite a worldwide campaign starting at T.R.A.F.F.I.C. Anyone looking these CLOWNS up will find out just what he and his brother Heitor attempted to do and got SPANKED! GUILTY! NEXT!!!!!

MARCIO CHAVES BROTHER HEITOR CHAVES OF BUSCAPE.COM.BR FOUND GUILTY OF REVERSE DOMAIN NAME HIJACKING. THEY WILL WEAR THESE LABELS FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIVES.

Feel free to display and distribute and point to this case when you are getting bullied. Don't take this SHIT from anybody EVER AGAIN! Big or small.

I believe not only is this a big win, but it is as clear and decisive a case of RDNH that has ever been decided. WE get to point to this episode for years to come as we have to deal with more and more predators trying to HIJACK our assets. This will not be the last we hear of this particular SaveMe.com case. This is a building block that will be used by me to protect other domains by creating case law.

I hope this case is used in other defenses and becomes a turning point in how folks approach this type situation. These folks are FRAUDS that tried a scheme that bent the spirit of the UDRP and it backfired on them in the short run and the long run. They have poisoned the well of negotiations and like they say in the old west, 'their money ain't no good around these parts.'

I think folks are beginning to understand that these decisons can affect the entire future of people and the days of terrible decisions will be less and less from this point on. I beleive there will be consequences for those that over reach on all sides. There is some definition that is now becoming visible. There will always be bad decisions, but there will be less of them and many will now go to Federal Court where standards are quite different and all eyes are watching.

You can consider this post and the one to come as 'spiking' the football in the end zone. I don't need to throw an elbow, I just need to shed light on this practice and use these CLOWNS as the vehicle to do it. HIJACKERS! So finds this world panel. Thieves in the social sense that got caught red handed for all their CUSTOMERS to see. In ink forever! NEVER to be trusted again!! That is their sentence! The Internet is about 'Character' and Reputation' and in this medium, they have destroyed both for themselves.

Today we celebrate a great victory. Tomorrow we start using the 2 x 4 with nails (metaphorically speaking) by spreading and circulating this story far and wide. I want to congratulate and thank my partner Howard Neu and all the other lawyers in the space that sent emails and offered their support. This was a huge victory and I can't put in words tonight what it really means. I only know what a loss would have meant and that would have been a very dark day for all. Howard's response was masterful, ballsy and we won BIG!

Since I met Howard in 1999 I told him of this case. I did not know which domain it would be, but I knew the case. I have prepared for years. I have written about it for years. It was only a matter of time and so it was. So these guys brought a knife to a nuclear fight and luckily it came late enough in the game in which panels are weighing things more evenly as so much is at stake!

D. Reverse Domain Name Hijacking

'In this case, the Panel is satisfied that the Complainant’s representatives were well aware of the importance of the chronological issue. The Complainant’s representatives are evidently familiar with the UDRP and both the Complaint and Amended Complaint make extensive reference to previous UDRP decisions. Yet the version of the Complaint originally filed simply ignored the issue of registration in bad faith, labelling the third factor as “Bad Faith In the Domain Name Use”. This must have involved deleting the reference to registration in bad faith from WIPO’s complaint template. After the Centre drew attention to this deficiency, the Complainant filed the Amended Complaint which belatedly addressed the issue of bad faith registration and, for the first time, invoked Octogen, seemingly as an afterthought.

Furthermore, the Complainant even predicted in the Amended Complaint that the Respondent would make an allegation of RDNH and so the Complainant clearly knew that it was skating on very thin ice.

The Complainant argued that RDNH cannot arise because the Complainant has merely sought cancellation of the disputed domain name, not transfer. The Panel disagrees. First, complainants should not be allowed to file cases known to be fatally flawed without the possibility of a finding of RDNH against them, by simply fine tuning the remedy sought. Second, as mentioned above, RDNH is defined as use of the Policy in bad faith “to attempt to deprive” a registrant of a domain name. If the Panel had ordered cancellation, the disputed domain name would in due course return to the domain pool where it would no doubt be subject to the attentions of the Complainant and others, with only a possibility that the Respondent itself might ultimately re-register it (assuming the Respondent sought to do so). Accordingly, the Complainant’s request for cancellation is no less an attempt to deprive the Respondent of the disputed domain name than a request for transfer would have been.

For the above reasons, the Panel finds that there has been RDNH in this case.

7. Decision

For all the foregoing reasons, the Complaint is denied and the Panel declares that it was brought in bad faith and constitutes an abuse of this proceeding.'

As you all know I know ZIP about SEO. I contend it is about relevance.

Do a Google search of my friend and watch what happens in the days ahead as HIJACKER is added to the Prefix of his name just like Dr. would be used. The FIRST thing folks will find out about this CLOWN is that World Intellectual Property Organization labled him a HIJACKER of domain names and all the scrubbing in the world won't make it go away:

'Márcio Mello Chaves, Heitor Chaves and SaveMe.com.br.....You are going to be the poster boys that ends up protecting every dot com domain holder in the world from predators and lowlifes like you. SCUM! Márcio Mello Chaves, you and your brother just peed on the HIGH VOLTAGE ELECTRIC FENCE! Me. But you and that third rate company you represent can't afford MY domain name. Dotcom is KING! I have owned SaveMe.com for 16 YEARS and you will not STEAL it from me or anyone. You and SaveMe.com.br are just being exposed as the predators you are. Maybe those tactics work for you sometimes, not here. Not ever again. Let's see what your own customers have to say when this goes viral. You opened this can of worms. DEAL WITH IT! Here is his Linkedin Page so if you get an email from him, run!'

And how does his Law Firm, Almeida Advogados, Brazil, continue to employ him after this? Shouldn't there at least be some admission of wrong doing?? An apology? An offer to pay my expenses? I won't hold my breath but we will see if they actually condone and encourage REVERSE DOMAIN NAME HIJACKING by their actions. Courage or Coward? Almeida Advogados, Brazil you too have responsibilty and you too will pay dearly if you remain silent. Speak out now or NEVER!

Lastly, I want to thank the panel for a well thought out decision and for not being hoodwinked by the antics of the Chaves Brothers. It took time, courage and a willingness to look at the facts to make that comprehensive decision!

In this area I will be linking to other cases of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking as WE find them:

Case #3 CinemaCity.com The Complainant is Prime Pictures LLC of Dubai, United Arab Emirates (“UAE”), represented by Law offices of Vince Ravine, PC, United States of America (“USA”). Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #4 CollectiveMedia.com The Complainant is Collective Media, Inc., New York, United States of America, represented by Lowenstein Sandler PC, United States of America is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #6 ForSale.ca Globe Media International Corporation is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #7 Mess.com Kiwi Shoe Polish Company, The Complainant is Mess Enterprises, San Francisco, California, of United States of America, represented by Steve Clinton, United States of America is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #8 Goldline.com The Complainant is Goldline International, Inc., represented by Spataro & Associates is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #9 K2R.com The complainant is a Swiss company, K2r Produkte AG of Haggenstrasse 45, CH 9014 St. Gallen, Switzerland is a Reverse Domain Name Hijacker

Case #13 DreamGirls.com The Complainant is Dreamgirls, Inc., Tampa, Florida, United States of America, represented by Christensen, Miller, Fink, Jacobs, Glaser, Weil & Shapiro, LLP, Los Angeles, California, United States of America and have been labeled a 'Reverse Domain Name Hijacker'.

Case #15 Windsor.com Complainant in this administrative proceeding is Windsor Fashions, Inc., a California corporation with a principal place of business in Los Angeles, California, United States of America. Complainant is represented in this proceeding by Abraham M. Rudy, Esq. and Julie Waldman, Esq., Weisman, Wolff, Bergman, Coleman, Grodin & Evall LLP, Beverly Hills, California, United States of America. They have been labeled a 'Reverse Domain Name Hijacker'.

Case #16 Mindo.com Complainants are Scandinavian Leadership AB and Mindo AB of Uppsala, Sweden, internally represented. They have been labeled a 'Reverse Domain Name Hijacker'.

Case # 19 Takeout.com. Complainant is Tarheel Take-Out, LLC of Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America (“U.S.”), represented internally. They have been labeled a 'Reverse Domain Name Hijacker'.

Case # 20 WallStreet.com The Complainant is Wall-Street.com, LLC of Florida, United States of America (the “United States” or “US”), represented by Flint IP Law, United States. They have been labeled a 'Reverse Domain Name Hijacker'.

Case # 21 parvi.org found for the complainant in 2009 but in 2012 the courts rules that the City of Paris, France was guilty of 'Reverse Domain Name Hijacking' in a landmark case that resulted in a $125,000 judgement against the city.

Case #22 gtms.com The Complainant is Sustainable Forestry Management Limited, a company incorporated under the laws of Bermuda, with its principal place of business in London, United Kingdom. The Complainant is represented by its general counsel, Mr. Eric Bettelheim. They have been labeled a 'Reverse Domain Name Hijacker'.

All of these companies will be 'Recognized' at T.R.A.F.F.I.C. They are going to rue the day they decided to engage in hijacking. 1000x worse than being called a cybersquatter. The tables have been turned. Deal with it!

Congrats Guys! You have all been tagged as HIJACKERS!! You will never rid yourselves of this title and it will follow these companies, people around for a very long time. This is the beginning of the end for this disgusting practice you PRICKS. Explin to your associates, clients, family memebers and neighbors. Blame YOURSELVES not ME!

And let's not forget the Goofoff.com case and these CLOWNS! and what they tied to pull.

Here are all related posts I have made on these DOMAIN NAME HIJACKERS. The first step in the next phase is to assemble EVERY case of RDNH and list them HERE!!

The reason this was such an important landmark win is because of the clarity of the facts. Had this decision gone the other way, we all know the very foundation of legitimate rights to domain names would have been threatened. The domain aftermarket would have been under a cloud. The entire capitalistic basis and foundation that every single domain owner has would have been in jeopardy and ripe for the predators. Now they have been warned of what will happen when you engage in this activity. It will have consequences you, your family, your colleagues will have to explain and deal with forever.

I'll give you $100 for that domain!!!

That’s great, Rick!!! Thanks for standing up.
I’m planning on doing my part too…..I’m just waiting on that next UDRP lottery ticket to hit me.
Unless I’m missing something, the courts don’t recognize the UDRP system or the panel decisions, so these have to be decided in Federal court to help create some case law. It does create a great UDRP case to reference for future defense.

Josh

Yet the version of the Complaint originally filed simply ignored the issue of registration in bad faith, labelling the third factor as “Bad Faith In the Domain Name Use”. This must have involved deleting the reference to registration in bad faith from WIPO’s complaint template.
Changed the WIPO template and hoped no one would notice? Really? Hahah. Dishonest and just not very bright. If Márcio Mello Chaves will try to steal a domain name and attempt to make hidden alterations to legal documents, do you want to business with him? That’s the question all prospective clients need to ask when they Google his name: Márcio Mello Chaves

This was a comment posted just yesterday at the original Post about this subject and I think it should be here as well:
Luiz Pacheco said…
Hello, I’m from Brazil and I was trying to reach saveme.com.br and accidently I ended up here. At first I didn’t understand what was going on but after reading your text i realized the”problem”.
Also, let me thank you for letting me know that saveme and buscape are from the same owner. Buscape is well know for illegal practices in Brazil like fraud, smuggling, conspiracy among other things and its owner Marcio Mello Chaves is also known for the same acts. Since the beggining Buscape has been prejudced consumers all over the country by offering products and services from malicious websites and yet gainning a lot of profits on these fraudlent issues.
Both of the main pro-consumer sites in Brazil (Reclame Aqui and Confiômetro) rate Buscape as NOT TRUSTWORTH. A quick research on google let me prove about above afirmations.http://www.reclameaqui.com.br/indices/9742/bondfaro-buscape/http://www.e-commercebrasil.org/negocios/buscape-nao-se-entende-com-reclame-aqui/http://www.confiometro.com.br/buscape/reclamacaohttp://srclicker.wordpress.com/2007/09/09/fraude-no-buscape-sites-roubam-pequenos-empresarios/
I am one of the prejudice consumers losing about US$1,8k in 2010 when trying to buy a computer from a e-commerce site that Buscape had a partnership. Never got my money back.
I will stop using Saveme from now on. And wish you good luck against those bastards.
ps: Márcio Mello Chaves deleted his profile from facebook LOL coward prick.

Congrats on the win Rick. The right decision was obviously made.
It is too bad a RDNH finding doesn’t come with any penalties.
It would really set a precedent if the person found guilty of RDNH was sued in court to recover actual and punitive damages.
Brad

“the Complainant even predicted in the Amended Complaint that the Respondent would make an allegation of RDNH and so the Complainant clearly knew that it was skating on very thin ice.”
Gotta love that one ;)

Never let the same dog bite you twice

I’m very happy Rick WON :)
Rick is a real man and has changed
my life from his advice over the years.
This will be a BIG WARNING to other
people who try to steal domains from
other people!!
POSTER BOY 100% going to be famous

James

Ian

I believe that he is a member of a law society? Well, a very strong complaint showing this abuse and unprofessional conduct etc should be sent to his society.
Most law societies will take a very dim view of abusing the legal process for self enrichment.

Guy

Rick, this is brilliant! I am laughing but actually also very proud of you and Howard, seriously.
You did what you had to do, it was obvious what the panel had to decide but in the past they have made horrific decisions, by 1 and 3 person panels. I mean so bad they have beggared belief.
They got it right this time and reverse hijacking was absolutely correct too.
I am LOVING the fact you are posting their images and labelling them as to what they are. Gotta love freedom of speech. let’s hope this episode means the police and other law enforcement take a closer look at these clowns.
well done again Howard and Rick, brilliant!

Guy

Rick, you will love this
here’s a video on youtube of Márcio Mello Chaves
seems to be his official channelhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qAR5WfyijQ
here he is giving his opinion of crimes on the internet lol
we need a portugese speaker to translate please?

CONGRATS! This is a HUGE win for all of us. It seems that the rate at which companies are filing frivolous UDRP’s lately is getting out of control and this should stop some of them dead in their tracks.
Big thumbs up!

ADAM

If that idiot has website I would check which keywords he is targeting then make sure my info with facts about him appears higher than his. Moreover,the Internet is growing and its importance too so I am sure he will be very regret his dishonesty with every passing year.

ADAM

ps bit.. like him always have many excuses why they do something but the truth is only one they are bit…If we punished that guy infamously enough to other similar guy know it that would really help this industry and other would think twice before doing anything similar.

Hello Rick, All Smiles to you ,
Congratulations goes out to Rick and Howard, and all top of pyramid Domainers who have had to fight off POACHERS. There may be a reward in the stock market for those checking out a comment I made on or about 6/11/12 about Marchex post that, in retrospect is spot on, that I put out on Michaels THEDOMAINS.com. Again Congratulations Dudes job well done !
Gratefully, Jeff Schneider (Contact Group) (Metal Tiger)

Homero A. Gonzalez

Congratulations to Rick, Howard Neu and kudos to the panelists. This case is a landmark one and all domainers benefit from it. Now and in the future. Thank you Rick and Howard for fighting with passion and laser sharp focus. Reverse domain name hijackers and would be reverse domain name hijackers, Beware!…

The decision could hardly have been in plainer terms had you been allowed to look over their shoulder and dictate it! Your prediction that this will have positive repercussions for legitimate domain holders going forward WILL play out to be true. Congratulations on a battle well fought, and a victory well deserved!

Domainer

For all the foregoing reasons, the Complaint is denied and the Panel declares that it was brought in bad faith
and constitutes an abuse of this proceeding.
Whew!
Justice prevails!
Congrats, Rick and Howard! A lot was riding on that decision and I’m glad to hear it worked out well. Great job!

a.

Julia MacKenzie

Is it really worth worrying about? i get the fact that these chancers tried to get something without paying for it but, come on, lifes too short to draw and quarter them after theyve already been hung.. IMHO once you have the name back, any time you spend post that, outing them and and researching their photos and history etc etc blah blah blah is time completely wasted.

Julia, you are very wrong on that one.
This is what Mike Berkens said on his blog thedomains.com
“I’ll tell you why this decision means something and is important
Because had it not been vigorously defended and if the decision went the other way, the domain aftermarket would be irreparably harmed.”http://www.thedomains.com/2012/06/16/rick-schwartz-wins-the-udrp-on-saveme-com-get-a-finding-of-reverse-domain-name-hijacking/
See, I have an empire to protect and that is why I will go on a crusade to expose Reverse Domain Name Hijacking and those that engage in it and ALL entities involved. This is a new day. Much more than blah, blah, blah!

PTDomainer

It is time to celebrate, i know. I am very happy to see this precedent being on the right side of the game.
But, i am still concerned with new domainers that started making their portfolios just a few time back.
Are they protected for generic words? That is a question that i dont see answered in this case…
Anyway, Parabéns Rick, Parabéns Howard, and a huge Parabéns to the panelists that in the moment of truth, sticked to the right side.
Para o Márcio Melo e seus camaradas, só vos tenho a dizer que esta é a verdadeira diferença entre demonstrar paixão pelo que se faz e demonstrar o interesse pelo que os outros conseguem fazer.

Marcio,
Come and tell us what was going through your mind when you set this all in motion?
Be a man. Have some cojones! If you want to start the process of rehabilitating your reputation you would find some eager ears. Anything else and I can guarantee you will never lose the label. Don’t be angry at me, go smack yourself and your brother silly until you figure it out.

PTDomainer

He is mainly talking about the need of people having good behaviours on the internet, because acording to him, people think that there isnt a law to apply on internet crimes.
Then he advertises their website, which is http://www.dnt.adv.br/ for a better understanding of these internet law subjects.
Therefore, i dont think you need an exact translation because quite frankly…do you want to waste time listening to a criminal preach?
I also dont think so…
Rick, they will never come here. Its a fact, the mouse has abandoned the titanic already.

Ryan

Congratulations Rick & Howard !!
I was more than optimistic that you would not STOP until you won.
You saved the domain industry from the”Gundas”. I did not sleep many nights as Corp. branded me as if I used my parked domains on”Bad Faith”. What a nice ICANN clause!
Justice done! Justice Prevailed!!

Excellent news ! Well done to you. So much for all those loonies who were saying you didn’t have a case ! The pics are nice BTW but they just need a row of number at the bottom to make them really stand out. :-)

Hello Rick,
We cannot help but think that you could sue for damages to your BRAND?
Also a point we would like to make is you almost never see udrps go after other extensions. Why is this?
The real value lies in the”Virtual Business Foundation” .COM Channel.
Apple.com knows this, they know the internets Foundation rests in the .com Channel.
Gratefully, Jeff Schneider (Contact Group) (Metal Tiger)

Hello Rick,
Visulize this ;
Google.COM the BIG Daddy”Virtual Business Foundation” in the .COM Channel, in reality this is their BRAND , NOT GOOGLE but GOOGLE.COM.
Has their site Hi-jacked ! What do you think the value of their .COM BRAND is?
Rick you know the answer !
Gratefully, Jeff Schneider (Contact Group) (Metal Tiger)

Hello Rick,
The precedence has been set, and seems to us that the UDRP process is getting to favor the Virtual Business Foundation Owners. Great news, but the consequnces that filers suffer are non existent.
Felons are encouraged to roll the dice so to speak. Gee come to think of it!, the way the Udrp process stands NOW,they are not considered felons ? Somehow this does’nt compute? Seems to us this needs the attention of the Domaining Community and SOON.
Gratefully, Jeff Schneider (Contact Group) (Metal Tiger)

Richard

Brilliant!
(The PDF of Howard’s response doesn’t open, by the way)
I’m amazed that you want to be conciliatory. A leopard never changes its spots – they would only be going through the motions. You’re a warrior – this bit of the equation I don’t understand. How would a guest post from them help you? You would then stop making this case widely known, they would go back to their old ways, and someone else would try it on, not necessarily with you, but with other people.
Confused …

I still can’t see why Rick wouldn’t take $100,000 for Saveme.com
Where is the value in it.
I get candy.com
But saveme.com, its about a good price.
Ricks gone mad I am afraid my domain acquantinces.
We should see about getting him commited and then re auctioning off his domains.

Only thing I have handy: You may have to format a bit as a release.
Rick Schwartz, AKA Domain King®, is the co-founder of the T.R.A.F.F.I.C. Conference, and among the first high-powered domain investors on the web. He bought his first names in 1995, calling the acquisition of domains, “A unique opportunity in time.”
Mr. Schwartz quickly accumulated a portfolio of descriptive domains. He made his first million-dollar sale, of men.com, by the end of the 1990’s. He has sold names like iReport.com, which he purveyed directly to CNN, as well as Candy.com and Property.com. He maintains an interest in the latter two domains.
Most recently, Mr. Schwartz successfully defended the domain, saveme.com, from a reverse domain hijacking attempt, by an attorney in South America. Márcio Mello Chaves, of São Paulo, Brazil, filed a Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy action, (UDRP), in early 2012, claiming saveme.com had been registered in bad faith. Mr. Chaves also claimed saveme.com violated a pair of trademarks in Brazil.
The World Intellectual Property Organization, WIPO, ruled Mr. Chaves brought the UDRP in bad faith. WIPO noted that Mr. Schwartz has owned saveme.com since 1997, 13 years before Mr. Chaves filed for any trademark protections in Brazil, and 15 years before the UDRP claim was filed. WIPO panelists further wrote, in their decision, that Mr. Chaves has not been granted any actual trademarks, and that the UDRP was filed only after Mr. Chaves made an unsuccessful bid to buy saveme.com from Mr. Schwartz. WIPO has permanently branded Mr. Chaves as a reverse domain hijacker.

[…] must be some joke. A guy found GUILTY of abusing the system with a Reverse Domain Name Hijacking finding by a 3 member panel and what some would label a cyber criminal is on some commission about cyber […]

Hello Rick, The precedence has been set, and seems to us that the UDRP process is getting to favor the Virtual Business Foundation Owners. Great news, but the consequnces that filers suffer are non existent. Felons are encouraged to roll the dice so to speak. Gee come to think of it!, the way the Udrp process stands NOW,they are not considered felons ? Somehow this does’nt compute? Seems to us this needs the attention of the Domaining Community and SOON. Gratefully, Jeff Schneider (Contact Group) (Metal Tiger)